* [gentoo-dev] missing metadata.xml @ 2006-11-22 21:08 Steve Dibb 2006-11-22 23:29 ` Bryan Østergaard 2006-11-23 10:14 ` [gentoo-dev] " Christian Faulhammer 0 siblings, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Steve Dibb @ 2006-11-22 21:08 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev Hi guys, There are more than a few packages with missing metadata.xml in the portage tree. I've setup my funky little QA website to report on which ones fall in that category, and here is the list right here: http://spaceparanoids.org/gentoo/gpnl/qa.php?q=metadata I've spent the morning fixing up most of them, adding blank metadata.xml to them and assigning maintainer-needed@gentoo.org as the main maintainer, which in hindsight was probably not the best approach (my apologies). Anyway, either way, it would be nice to get the few remaining packages cleaned up, and if one of your packages is on that list, please update or create the metadata. I'll still be going through the rest of them and sorting out which ones were last maintained by a dev that is now retired and continue assigning them to maintainer-needed. Thanks Steve -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] missing metadata.xml 2006-11-22 21:08 [gentoo-dev] missing metadata.xml Steve Dibb @ 2006-11-22 23:29 ` Bryan Østergaard 2006-11-23 10:20 ` Jakub Moc 2006-11-23 10:56 ` David Shakaryan 2006-11-23 10:14 ` [gentoo-dev] " Christian Faulhammer 1 sibling, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Bryan Østergaard @ 2006-11-22 23:29 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 02:08:12PM -0700, Steve Dibb wrote: > Hi guys, > > There are more than a few packages with missing metadata.xml in the > portage tree. I've setup my funky little QA website to report on which > ones fall in that category, and here is the list right here: > > http://spaceparanoids.org/gentoo/gpnl/qa.php?q=metadata > > I've spent the morning fixing up most of them, adding blank metadata.xml > to them and assigning maintainer-needed@gentoo.org as the main > maintainer, which in hindsight was probably not the best approach (my > apologies). > > Anyway, either way, it would be nice to get the few remaining packages > cleaned up, and if one of your packages is on that list, please update > or create the metadata. > > I'll still be going through the rest of them and sorting out which ones > were last maintained by a dev that is now retired and continue assigning > them to maintainer-needed. > I think the most important thing about adding "empty" metadata.xml files with maintainer-needed as maintainer is that it _changes_ the package to be unmaintained by definition (that's what maintainer-needed means after all) and that we can't be sure that's actually true unless we spend a lot of time examining each package and asking potential maintainers if it's unmaintained. So while I enjoy getting metadata cleaned up etc. I think it's important to think about exactly what we're doing before "fixing" up a lot of packages - in this case 300+ packages. You (all devs!) might even want to ask on -dev ML if it's a good idea before touching up a huge number of packages to make sure you don't change things in subtle, unintentional ways. Anyway, I appreciate you spending time on cleaning up the metadata.xml files even if it might not have been the best idea in hindsight. Regards, Bryan Østergaard -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] missing metadata.xml 2006-11-22 23:29 ` Bryan Østergaard @ 2006-11-23 10:20 ` Jakub Moc 2006-11-23 12:40 ` Bryan Østergaard ` (2 more replies) 2006-11-23 10:56 ` David Shakaryan 1 sibling, 3 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Jakub Moc @ 2006-11-23 10:20 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1436 bytes --] Bryan Østergaard napsal(a): > I think the most important thing about adding "empty" metadata.xml files > with maintainer-needed as maintainer is that it _changes_ the package to > be unmaintained by definition (that's what maintainer-needed means after > all) and that we can't be sure that's actually true unless we spend a > lot of time examining each package and asking potential maintainers > if it's unmaintained. Actually, I don't mind much. There's a developers or two who keep on adding packages without metadata.xml all the time (won't name anyone, I'm pretty sure they'll find themselves here :P). This will either force them to reclaim their packages via fixing the metadata.xml thing or will leave the ebuilds orphaned to m-needed - and then they shouldn't have been added in the first place. Above, I'm not talking about legacy stuff maintained in an ad-hoc manner for ages, but about fairly recent additions to the tree (~1 year or even less). However, even for legacy stuff, nothing is preventing the people from claiming their ebuilds the right way and adding themselves to metadata.xml - will make assigning bugs much easier for me. ;) -- Best regards, Jakub Moc mailto:jakub@gentoo.org GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E ... still no signature ;) [-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] missing metadata.xml 2006-11-23 10:20 ` Jakub Moc @ 2006-11-23 12:40 ` Bryan Østergaard 2006-11-24 0:00 ` Andrej Kacian 2006-11-24 9:47 ` Paul de Vrieze 2 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Bryan Østergaard @ 2006-11-23 12:40 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 11:20:16AM +0100, Jakub Moc wrote: > Bryan Østergaard napsal(a): > > I think the most important thing about adding "empty" metadata.xml files > > with maintainer-needed as maintainer is that it _changes_ the package to > > be unmaintained by definition (that's what maintainer-needed means after > > all) and that we can't be sure that's actually true unless we spend a > > lot of time examining each package and asking potential maintainers > > if it's unmaintained. > > Actually, I don't mind much. There's a developers or two who keep on > adding packages without metadata.xml all the time (won't name anyone, > I'm pretty sure they'll find themselves here :P). This will either force > them to reclaim their packages via fixing the metadata.xml thing or will > leave the ebuilds orphaned to m-needed - and then they shouldn't have > been added in the first place. > > Above, I'm not talking about legacy stuff maintained in an ad-hoc manner > for ages, but about fairly recent additions to the tree (~1 year or even > less). However, even for legacy stuff, nothing is preventing the people > from claiming their ebuilds the right way and adding themselves to > metadata.xml - will make assigning bugs much easier for me. ;) > I not quite as concerned whether your job is "easy" or not as I am that we don't lie about maintainers in metadata.xml. Wrong metadata.xml files affects a lot more people (devs as well as users) than just bug-wranglers. Regards, Bryan Østergaard -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] missing metadata.xml 2006-11-23 10:20 ` Jakub Moc 2006-11-23 12:40 ` Bryan Østergaard @ 2006-11-24 0:00 ` Andrej Kacian 2006-11-24 9:59 ` Jakub Moc 2006-11-24 9:47 ` Paul de Vrieze 2 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Andrej Kacian @ 2006-11-24 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 435 bytes --] Dňa Thu, 23 Nov 2006 11:20:16 +0100 Jakub Moc <jakub@gentoo.org> napísal: > Actually, I don't mind much. There's a developers or two who keep on > adding packages without metadata.xml all the time (won't name anyone, > I'm pretty sure they'll find themselves here :P). Why? If someone does this, they need to be spanked - and for that, we need to know who they are. Kind regards, -- Andrej Kacian <ticho@gentoo.org> [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] missing metadata.xml 2006-11-24 0:00 ` Andrej Kacian @ 2006-11-24 9:59 ` Jakub Moc 2006-11-25 0:39 ` Jeroen Roovers 0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Jakub Moc @ 2006-11-24 9:59 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 716 bytes --] Andrej Kacian napsal(a): > Dňa Thu, 23 Nov 2006 11:20:16 +0100 > Jakub Moc <jakub@gentoo.org> napísal: > >> Actually, I don't mind much. There's a developers or two who keep on >> adding packages without metadata.xml all the time (won't name anyone, >> I'm pretty sure they'll find themselves here :P). > > Why? If someone does this, they need to be spanked Meh, even you got it right on the first try ^^^^^^^^ - no need to name anyone *g* -- Best regards, Jakub Moc mailto:jakub@gentoo.org GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E ... still no signature ;) [-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] missing metadata.xml 2006-11-24 9:59 ` Jakub Moc @ 2006-11-25 0:39 ` Jeroen Roovers 2006-11-25 0:55 ` Elfyn McBratney 0 siblings, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Jeroen Roovers @ 2006-11-25 0:39 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 10:59:32 +0100 Jakub Moc <jakub@gentoo.org> wrote: > Andrej Kacian napsal(a): > > Why? If someone does this, they need to be spanked > > Meh, even you got it right on the first try ^^^^^^^^ - no need to name > anyone *g* Well, in secret everybody knows that the "no-herd" herd has existed for ages and has two very active members... Kind regards, JeR -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] missing metadata.xml 2006-11-25 0:39 ` Jeroen Roovers @ 2006-11-25 0:55 ` Elfyn McBratney 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Elfyn McBratney @ 2006-11-25 0:55 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev On 25/11/06, Jeroen Roovers <jer@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Fri, 24 Nov 2006 10:59:32 +0100 > Jakub Moc <jakub@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > Andrej Kacian napsal(a): > > > Why? If someone does this, they need to be spanked > > > > Meh, even you got it right on the first try ^^^^^^^^ - no need to name > > anyone *g* > > Well, in secret everybody knows that the "no-herd" herd has existed for > ages and has two very active members... 'no' and 'herd'. *nod* --beu -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] missing metadata.xml 2006-11-23 10:20 ` Jakub Moc 2006-11-23 12:40 ` Bryan Østergaard 2006-11-24 0:00 ` Andrej Kacian @ 2006-11-24 9:47 ` Paul de Vrieze 2 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Paul de Vrieze @ 2006-11-24 9:47 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1690 bytes --] On Thursday 23 November 2006 11:20, Jakub Moc wrote: > Bryan Østergaard napsal(a): > > I think the most important thing about adding "empty" metadata.xml files > > with maintainer-needed as maintainer is that it _changes_ the package to > > be unmaintained by definition (that's what maintainer-needed means after > > all) and that we can't be sure that's actually true unless we spend a > > lot of time examining each package and asking potential maintainers > > if it's unmaintained. > > Actually, I don't mind much. There's a developers or two who keep on > adding packages without metadata.xml all the time (won't name anyone, > I'm pretty sure they'll find themselves here :P). This will either force > them to reclaim their packages via fixing the metadata.xml thing or will > leave the ebuilds orphaned to m-needed - and then they shouldn't have > been added in the first place. > > Above, I'm not talking about legacy stuff maintained in an ad-hoc manner > for ages, but about fairly recent additions to the tree (~1 year or even > less). However, even for legacy stuff, nothing is preventing the people > from claiming their ebuilds the right way and adding themselves to > metadata.xml - will make assigning bugs much easier for me. ;) Repoman should check for missing metadata. The only packages that are allowed not to have metadata.xml would be those that have not been changed for over 3 years (since the introduction of metadata.xml). Developers who violate the repoman checks by omitting a metadata.xml brought mayhem over themselves. Paul -- Paul de Vrieze Gentoo Developer Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net [-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 185 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] missing metadata.xml 2006-11-22 23:29 ` Bryan Østergaard 2006-11-23 10:20 ` Jakub Moc @ 2006-11-23 10:56 ` David Shakaryan 2006-11-23 12:37 ` Bryan Østergaard 1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: David Shakaryan @ 2006-11-23 10:56 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev Bryan Østergaard wrote: > On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 02:08:12PM -0700, Steve Dibb wrote: >> Hi guys, >> >> There are more than a few packages with missing metadata.xml in the >> portage tree. I've setup my funky little QA website to report on which >> ones fall in that category, and here is the list right here: >> >> http://spaceparanoids.org/gentoo/gpnl/qa.php?q=metadata >> >> I've spent the morning fixing up most of them, adding blank metadata.xml >> to them and assigning maintainer-needed@gentoo.org as the main >> maintainer, which in hindsight was probably not the best approach (my >> apologies). >> >> Anyway, either way, it would be nice to get the few remaining packages >> cleaned up, and if one of your packages is on that list, please update >> or create the metadata. >> >> I'll still be going through the rest of them and sorting out which ones >> were last maintained by a dev that is now retired and continue assigning >> them to maintainer-needed. >> > I think the most important thing about adding "empty" metadata.xml files > with maintainer-needed as maintainer is that it _changes_ the package to > be unmaintained by definition (that's what maintainer-needed means after > all) and that we can't be sure that's actually true unless we spend a > lot of time examining each package and asking potential maintainers > if it's unmaintained. I see what you mean here, but asking potential maintainers doesn't seem like too much of a solution, as it would take a lot of time and energy. In my opinion, if the package is actually maintained, then it shouldn't be hard for the maintainer to fix the metadata, adding himself as the maintainer or at least assigning it to a herd. -- David Shakaryan GnuPG Public Key: 0x4B8FE14B -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] missing metadata.xml 2006-11-23 10:56 ` David Shakaryan @ 2006-11-23 12:37 ` Bryan Østergaard 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Bryan Østergaard @ 2006-11-23 12:37 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev On Thu, Nov 23, 2006 at 02:56:49AM -0800, David Shakaryan wrote: > Bryan Østergaard wrote: > >On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 02:08:12PM -0700, Steve Dibb wrote: > >>Hi guys, > >> > >>There are more than a few packages with missing metadata.xml in the > >>portage tree. I've setup my funky little QA website to report on which > >>ones fall in that category, and here is the list right here: > >> > >>http://spaceparanoids.org/gentoo/gpnl/qa.php?q=metadata > >> > >>I've spent the morning fixing up most of them, adding blank metadata.xml > >>to them and assigning maintainer-needed@gentoo.org as the main > >>maintainer, which in hindsight was probably not the best approach (my > >>apologies). > >> > >>Anyway, either way, it would be nice to get the few remaining packages > >>cleaned up, and if one of your packages is on that list, please update > >>or create the metadata. > >> > >>I'll still be going through the rest of them and sorting out which ones > >>were last maintained by a dev that is now retired and continue assigning > >>them to maintainer-needed. > >> > >I think the most important thing about adding "empty" metadata.xml files > >with maintainer-needed as maintainer is that it _changes_ the package to > >be unmaintained by definition (that's what maintainer-needed means after > >all) and that we can't be sure that's actually true unless we spend a > >lot of time examining each package and asking potential maintainers > >if it's unmaintained. > > I see what you mean here, but asking potential maintainers doesn't seem > like too much of a solution, as it would take a lot of time and energy. > In my opinion, if the package is actually maintained, then it shouldn't > be hard for the maintainer to fix the metadata, adding himself as the > maintainer or at least assigning it to a herd. > I completely agree that adding metadata.xml files is easy for the maintainers and should be done. What I'm objecting to is randomly adding metadata.xml files to packages without any idea if the added files are actually correct. If you can't solve the problem properly you should probably stop to think about a proper solution instead of just taking the easy (but quite possible wrong) solution. Regards, Bryan Østergaard -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [gentoo-dev] Re: missing metadata.xml 2006-11-22 21:08 [gentoo-dev] missing metadata.xml Steve Dibb 2006-11-22 23:29 ` Bryan Østergaard @ 2006-11-23 10:14 ` Christian Faulhammer 2006-11-24 4:39 ` Donnie Berkholz ` (2 more replies) 1 sibling, 3 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Christian Faulhammer @ 2006-11-23 10:14 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev Tach Steve, 0x2B859DE3 (PGP-PK-ID) Steve Dibb schrieb: > There are more than a few packages with missing metadata.xml in the > portage tree. I've setup my funky little QA website to report on which > ones fall in that category, and here is the list right here: Nice idea, but you should really add <herd>no-herd</herd> as this is required if there is only a "maintainer". By the way, I tagged some metadata files with appropriate herd (where I am allowed): app-emacs/cperl-mode emacs dev-lisp/cl-asdf-binary-locations common-lisp I suggest the following changes: app-misc/baobab vapier and/or Gnome (as this is part of Gnome 2.16) dev-scheme/guile-pg scheme dev-scheme/kawa scheme dev-scheme/mzscheme scheme dev-util/cweb text-markup and/or lang-misc V-Li -- Fingerprint: 68C5 D381 B69A A777 6A91 E999 350A AD7C 2B85 9DE3 http://www.gnupg.org/ -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: missing metadata.xml 2006-11-23 10:14 ` [gentoo-dev] " Christian Faulhammer @ 2006-11-24 4:39 ` Donnie Berkholz 2006-11-24 6:37 ` David Shakaryan 2006-11-24 8:13 ` Christian Faulhammer 2006-11-24 8:11 ` Mart Raudsepp 2006-11-26 19:04 ` Christian Faulhammer 2 siblings, 2 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Donnie Berkholz @ 2006-11-24 4:39 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev Christian Faulhammer wrote: > Tach Steve, 0x2B859DE3 (PGP-PK-ID) > > Steve Dibb schrieb: >> There are more than a few packages with missing metadata.xml in the >> portage tree. I've setup my funky little QA website to report on which >> ones fall in that category, and here is the list right here: > > Nice idea, but you should really add <herd>no-herd</herd> as this is > required if there is only a "maintainer". Really? <herd/> isn't valid? I'd rather see that than adding a "fake" herd. Thanks, Donnie -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: missing metadata.xml 2006-11-24 4:39 ` Donnie Berkholz @ 2006-11-24 6:37 ` David Shakaryan 2006-11-24 8:13 ` Christian Faulhammer 1 sibling, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: David Shakaryan @ 2006-11-24 6:37 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 424 bytes --] Donnie Berkholz wrote: > Christian Faulhammer wrote: >> Nice idea, but you should really add <herd>no-herd</herd> as this >> is required if there is only a "maintainer". > > Really? <herd/> isn't valid? I'd rather see that than adding a "fake" herd. Neither are valid from what I understand. IIRC, kloeri said that every package should belong to a herd. -- David Shakaryan GnuPG Public Key: 0x4B8FE14B [-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [gentoo-dev] Re: missing metadata.xml 2006-11-24 4:39 ` Donnie Berkholz 2006-11-24 6:37 ` David Shakaryan @ 2006-11-24 8:13 ` Christian Faulhammer 2006-12-09 15:51 ` Ryan Hill 1 sibling, 1 reply; 18+ messages in thread From: Christian Faulhammer @ 2006-11-24 8:13 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev Tach Donnie, 0x2B859DE3 (PGP-PK-ID) Donnie Berkholz schrieb: > Christian Faulhammer wrote: >> Steve Dibb schrieb: >>> There are more than a few packages with missing metadata.xml in the >>> portage tree. I've setup my funky little QA website to report on >>> which ones fall in that category, and here is the list right here: >> Nice idea, but you should really add <herd>no-herd</herd> as this is >> required if there is only a "maintainer". > Really? <herd/> isn't valid? I'd rather see that than adding a "fake" > herd. I though I read about it being mandatory with "no-herd"...yes Alec Warner wrote that (implicitly). But I am not really sure. At least, herd tag is mandatory, in whatever way. V-Li -- Fingerprint: 68C5 D381 B69A A777 6A91 E999 350A AD7C 2B85 9DE3 http://www.gnupg.org/ -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [gentoo-dev] Re: missing metadata.xml 2006-11-24 8:13 ` Christian Faulhammer @ 2006-12-09 15:51 ` Ryan Hill 0 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Ryan Hill @ 2006-12-09 15:51 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 650 bytes --] opfer@gentoo.org (Christian Faulhammer) wrote: > Donnie Berkholz schrieb: > > Christian Faulhammer wrote: > >> Nice idea, but you should really add <herd>no-herd</herd> as this > >> is required if there is only a "maintainer". > > Really? <herd/> isn't valid? I'd rather see that than adding a > > "fake" herd. > > I though I read about it being mandatory with "no-herd"...yes Alec > Warner wrote that (implicitly). But I am not really sure. At least, > herd tag is mandatory, in whatever way. http://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writing/misc-files/metadata/index.html http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/metastructure/herds/index.xml [-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: missing metadata.xml 2006-11-23 10:14 ` [gentoo-dev] " Christian Faulhammer 2006-11-24 4:39 ` Donnie Berkholz @ 2006-11-24 8:11 ` Mart Raudsepp 2006-11-26 19:04 ` Christian Faulhammer 2 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Mart Raudsepp @ 2006-11-24 8:11 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev [-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 862 bytes --] On Thu, 2006-11-23 at 11:14 +0100, Christian Faulhammer wrote: > I suggest the following changes: > > app-misc/baobab vapier and/or Gnome (as this is part of Gnome > 2.16) Not gnome. baobab is part of gnome-utils as of 2.16, and gets installed from gnome-extra/gnome-utils which, I realize now, is begging for a app-misc/baobab blocker to avoid collisions *adds to his growing TODO list* Earlier I put app-admin/sabayon under gnome, which seemed to have been forgotten when moving over to portage from gnome-experimental overlay. I intend to personally take over maintenance of dev-util/sysprof and dev-util/memprof later on if no-one else is willing. /me pokes dev-tools herd for co-maintenance -- Mart Raudsepp Gentoo Developer Mail: leio@gentoo.org Weblog: http://planet.gentoo.org/developers/leio [-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --] [-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
* [gentoo-dev] Re: missing metadata.xml 2006-11-23 10:14 ` [gentoo-dev] " Christian Faulhammer 2006-11-24 4:39 ` Donnie Berkholz 2006-11-24 8:11 ` Mart Raudsepp @ 2006-11-26 19:04 ` Christian Faulhammer 2 siblings, 0 replies; 18+ messages in thread From: Christian Faulhammer @ 2006-11-26 19:04 UTC (permalink / raw To: gentoo-dev Tach, 0x2B859DE3 (PGP-PK-ID) > dev-scheme/guile-pg scheme > dev-scheme/kawa scheme > dev-scheme/mzscheme scheme Done. V-Li -- Fingerprint: 68C5 D381 B69A A777 6A91 E999 350A AD7C 2B85 9DE3 http://www.gnupg.org/ -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 18+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2006-12-09 15:54 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 18+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2006-11-22 21:08 [gentoo-dev] missing metadata.xml Steve Dibb 2006-11-22 23:29 ` Bryan Østergaard 2006-11-23 10:20 ` Jakub Moc 2006-11-23 12:40 ` Bryan Østergaard 2006-11-24 0:00 ` Andrej Kacian 2006-11-24 9:59 ` Jakub Moc 2006-11-25 0:39 ` Jeroen Roovers 2006-11-25 0:55 ` Elfyn McBratney 2006-11-24 9:47 ` Paul de Vrieze 2006-11-23 10:56 ` David Shakaryan 2006-11-23 12:37 ` Bryan Østergaard 2006-11-23 10:14 ` [gentoo-dev] " Christian Faulhammer 2006-11-24 4:39 ` Donnie Berkholz 2006-11-24 6:37 ` David Shakaryan 2006-11-24 8:13 ` Christian Faulhammer 2006-12-09 15:51 ` Ryan Hill 2006-11-24 8:11 ` Mart Raudsepp 2006-11-26 19:04 ` Christian Faulhammer
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox